Tolerances and complex problems

One of my favourite quotations gets a regular airing . . .  indeed much more regular than my blog posts have been recently.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

H. L. Mencken  (1880 to 1956)

Almost everyone laughs at that.  It sounds both incisive and frivolous at the same time.  I expect most people then dismiss it from their minds and would probably be delighted if they hear it again in a year or two without getting any more wisdom from it.

For me, after enjoying it and regularly using it while reviewing technical designs in a complex engineering environment it has taken on a extra layer of meaning.  It should be the motto of all practical engineers.  What most people don't realise is that the art of engineering is to make things that might be a little bit wrong but to ensure that they are right enough to function correctly.

Engineers call this 'tolerancing'.  Proper choice of tolerances in any design is the art of balancing performance against cost.  If you get the design too right you might not be able to afford to build it, or might not have enough time.

This is well illustrated by the old story about how to tell the difference between a scientist and an engineer. 

Stand them in opposing corners of a room, with an attractive member of the opposite sex naked (and presumably rather tolerant and open-minded) in the middle.  Tell them to approach that person by successively halving the distance between themselves and the object of their desire. Then wait.

The first one to leave the room will be the scientist, who has worked out that, in this way, you will never really get there. The engineer, however, has figured out that you will get close enough - for all practical purposes.

No through road

This is an interesting take on graffiti on road signs.  I've posted some Parisian road sign graffiti before, but this is a new one on me.  No through road for mythical characters here!

No through road for mythical saviours

Its interesting though.  When I see people wearing a cross around their necks I usually find myself wanting to ask what the T stands for.

Now I know!

BBC film crews

Having been somewhat involved with the workings of a BBC film crew yesterday, for a programme that will be hosted by Richard Hammond, I am left with a few observations about BBC film crews.

The staff all seemed to be polite, pleasant and reasonable people.  They even gave the impression of understanding what our technical staff were talking about - at least when they took the time to listen.  I was surprised to hear the producer asking one of his interviewees not to dumb it down so much - and this was for a science programme on the BBC.  Yes really!

I suppose this is not a proper science programme like Horizon.  Perhaps Sunday evening specials are allowed to present real science instead?

Another surprise was that they preferred to film in very low light, to the extent that most of the people who were trying to do a real job, operating a complex fusion machine, were complaining that they couldn't see what they were doing.  Most film crews from other TV stations including the independents can cope with the normal lighting conditions, but it will be interesting to see the difference when the programme comes out.  Perhaps it will be spectacularly better than average.

And yes - it is true that Hammond is not a tall man.

But the biggest surprise is that the film crew must have numbered at least a dozen people.  Like the last time I saw a BBC crew for a high profile programme in action, I wondered what most of them were supposed to be doing.  Not much, from all appearances!  Funded by the tax payer, it seems that they can afford to employ four or five times more staff than most other companies.

After all, these are times of austerity.

Preaching to the choir

We often hear the accusation that we are preaching to the choir.

On last week's episode of The Pod Delusion (a great British podcast 'about interesting things') I heard an interview with singer Shelley Segal.  She said that she liked to think that she was singing with the choir when she spreads her rationalist messages.  I liked that, but I have a slightly different point of view.

I think that half the choir are probably atheists anyway, so they might appreciate,  from time to time, a different message in the sermons that they have to suffer!

The sound of one hand clapping

Buddhists (I believe) use the expression 'the sound of one hand clapping' to represent something that is not possible, something transcendent that can be imagined but that cannot be achieved.  They think that it is a sound that is silent.

There is only one problem.

I can do it and it is not silent.  My father could do it, and I always remember when I was a boy, wondering how he could make it happen, when I couldn't do it myself.

When my hands got bigger I somehow realised that I could do it too, and I have gently made fun of my own children in the same way that my father did of me.  At last one of them can do it too - albeit quietly.  With practise he can carry the tradition to the next generation.

The recipe is to keep your fingers quite straight and close all four of them against your palm quite quickly.  Perhaps it helps to have long fingers, and my family seems to have the genes for that.

Try it . . . and refute a Zen Buddhist!

Brilliant people might not be the most productive

I used to report to a director, but via matrix management work for another utterly brilliant man.  When it came to detail, I felt like an intellectual-dwarf compared with either.  But looking at the situation in a different way I review it like this.

When I went to my director with a good idea I would come out of the meeting with an even better idea.

When I went to my day-to-day boss with an idea, I would return with three more ideas!  (None of them were mine but all were sensible.)

Both of them were brilliant men (and still are).  Neither of them had the talents of making a decision to do anything nor of making things happen, nor the talent of making people follow them.  I respect and like both of them in spite of those flaws.

After that I worked for someone who had none of the intellectual prowess of my previous bosses, and yet he seemed to be able to gather followers and lead the ordinary people in the direction that he required - whether it was for the company or for personal gain - whether the followers recognise that they were merely being used or not.

This sort of thing seems to have happened frustratingly often throughout my professional career.

So it seems to me to be clear that the most brilliant intellects have no chance of prevailing in the real world.  That probably means that a perfect world will never be achieved.  Incidentally, only one of the above - the one who I least respect - has children.

Is this happening the world over?  Does this make tomorrow's planned demonstrations 'The Big IF' in London a waste of time?  I won't be going, but I will certainly be writing about it.

The world is complicated isn't it?

The person of the Holy Spirit

One of the great mysteries that makes Christianity seem hard to believe is the doctrine of the Trinity.  Somehow God exists as three persons and yet is only one God. 

This mysterious and strange set of affairs is perhaps most clearly set out in the 'Athanasian Creed' - the one that you have probably never heard of.  Most Western Christians accept this 'third' creed as an accurate statement of their beliefs, even if they do not use it regularly in worship, preferring the Apostle's Creed and the Nicene Creed.  If you go to the Wikipedia page and read it you will probably understand why.  In its repetitive and multiply-redundant phraseology it tells us about the three persons of God - and if we have been brought up in a Christian culture it is very likely that we won't give much thought to the following question.

Who is 'the person' of the Holy Spirit?

Obviously we can understand the concept of Jesus as a person, even if we happen to have a view that he might have been a mythical person.  God, the father, is a little harder to envisage as the second person, in that he has no earthly form, except in a few Old Testament stories.

But the person of the Holy Spirit is something that is so familiar that we never question it - and yet so alien that we can't imagine it either.

Do you find that as paradoxical as me?

Jack or Jill?

I have to do a little maintenance on a family laptop.  When I say 'maintenance', I suppose I really mean that it is major surgery, to replace the connector on the motherboard for the power lead.

Don't lose heart, I'm not going to get too technical.  I just want to muse on the etymology of technical jargon, and perhaps to make a little fun of it.

In locating the spare part that I need, I used the power of Ebay, naturally, and found the component at a very reasonable price.  Finding it was not difficult, but the description is "ASUS . . . Genuine DC Power Jack Socket Connector."  So why does this seem strange? 

To me, the jack is the plug that plugs into this socket connector, and you could read the description that way.  On the other hand, thinking of the many variants on the nursery rhyme about Jack and Jill you might think of it in a different way.

If the plug is a Jack, does that make the socket a Jill?

Another Islamic attack?

Today there was an incident in Woolwich, London.  Some say that it was an islamic attack on a British soldier who was off-duty.  Maybe it was and maybe it wasn't.  Some say that it is what is happening in Syria every day, and they probably have a point. 

After all, the media can't even decide whether it was a machete attack or a knife attack, or whether the murderers were wielding a knife or a gun, or both.

But they looked a bit foreign and a bit Islamic!

The one thing that seems odd to me is that the Muslim Council of Britain apparently said in a statement: "This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly.  Our thoughts are with the victim and his family."

Nice words, coming from a self appointed bunch of islamic clerics who have no right to claim to speak on behalf of anyone at all.  It must mean that they are feeling guilty about something.  One of the problems with Islam is that it has no hierarchy and no authorities who can speak for it.

Will we ever know the truth behind this incident or will BBC/government propaganda be the only thing we find out?

Incidentally . . . how many other murders happened in London today?  Why are they not newsworthy?

My two 'spirit guides'

A dear friend told me today that I have invisible companionship.

This is not just one spirit guide, but two!  Apparently not everyone is blessed in this way, but it is far from unusual.  My friend claims to have more guides than me.

I find it genuinely interesting that I know people who believe in things that I can't recognise in the world.  My Christian friends know God through his son Jesus (in spite of all that nonsense about the Trinity which makes no real sense to anyone as far as I can tell).  My Islamic friends have faith in Allah and his prophet Mohamed (upon whom I wish no peace or blessing whatsoever).  At least Islam is a little less 'spooky', even though I find it more frightening in other ways.  And my own sister sees ghosts and has always been much more sensitive to the paranormal than I am.

I'm almost jealous of them.  It seems that I am missing this special, interesting, sixth sense.

I don't even believe that we have souls in this dualistic sense, so I find it very difficult to believe in ghosts or spirits.  But I am still fascinated by the idea.

As for these invisible companions who (apparently) know so much about me, very little has been revealed.  They don't have names and nothing is known of the lives that they no longer have.  Both are (or were?) male, which I find genuinely surprising since the minority of my close friends would want to claim that. 

Apparently one is mischievous and the other is 'a free spirit'.  What that happens to say about me is unclear.

What questions can I ask my friend to find out more about my guides?  Your input would be useful.  Please leave a comment if you can help.  I can already think of a few questions.

• Have they chosen me of have I chosen them?
• Do they like me?
• Do they 'guide' anyone else?

Any more?

Clarke's First Law

Today I was reminded of Arthur C Clarke's 'first law'.  Clarke was one of my favorite sci-fi authors as I grew up, and he is famous for having invented the idea of the geo-synchronous orbit.  We all rely on these satellites for communications these days.

Clarke maintained that three laws were enough for anyone - so he limited himself to this many.

His first law has often seemed right to me:

When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

See Clarke's three laws here

Short-lived apostates

From the great series, Jesus and Mo, comes this slightly sinister offering (originally via this link).

Jesus and Mo - "Green" from here

What a parent can never say to a teenage child!

This came up on Facebook.  It is what most sensible parents of teenagers really need to say but few of us would dare to try it.  Imagine the sulks!

Words for teenagers - what parents ought to say!

So if you are an uncle/aunt or family friend and can say it on behalf of apparent, then I think you will find that you have grateful friends.

After all, it it only explaining about the things that kept us entertained when we we teenagers.

Amazon intelligence

I buy lots of things through Amazon and have done for several years.  I probably spend thousands each year via that site and in the few cases where there has been a glitch in the product or the delivery they move heaven and earth to correct the problem.

Compared with other internet merchants I find that they balance quality and cost exceptionally well.  Buy from some of the Far-East merchants masquerading as UK companies and you have no idea whether you will get a product that complies with local safety regulations, or that your product with its '3 year warranty' will really have a warranty at all.  More on that topic in the next post, very soon, in a post called Top-battery.co.uk's excellent 3 year warranty.

But Amazon does do one thing that surprises me.  I'm more amused than annoyed but I wonder why they do it.

Now, if I happen to browse for a product (such as a replacement watch battery) and later choose to buy it from somewhere else then I could understand why Amazon might continue to offer other versions of the same or similar products to me.

But if I do actually browse Amazon and place an order for the product, what is the point of continuing to offer me alternatives?  There must be some reason why this is a good algorithm or they wouldn't keep doing it.  But I only need one watch battery for the next 5 years, so why would I buy another one just now?

The benefit of this strategy isn't obvious - not to me at least!

A budgie called Onan

When I was at university I had a friend and neighbour who had previously owned a pet budgerigar.

Somehow, it was revealed one day that the budgie had been called Onan.  At the time I hadn't heard of this minor character from the book of Genesis.  If you read about him in this story you can see that the name was chosen by someone with a sense of humour and a good knowledge of the bible.

Just like the budgie, Onan 'spilled his seed on the ground'.

Correcting the Ten Commandments

Correcting the Ten Commandments

Attempting to visit the Stone Museum in Great Bedwyn today, I found this amusing plaque on the wall.

See the second line.  The notion of correcting the ten commandments seems to be a very good aspiration. The rest of the plaque is entertaining too.

I wonder what the commandments said after correction.

Why aren't ghosts naked?

We all know people who claim to have seen ghosts, even if those people are usually sensible enough not to have told you about what they have experienced.

But have you ever heard anyone claim that they have seen a naked ghost?  I'm left wondering how these disembodied spirits have some way of remembering what clothes their corporeal forms used to wear, and indeed how they choose from the wardrobe that must have changed throughout their lives.

You might argue that this is no stranger than the concept that the ghost's former self changed its appearance throughout its life, but that somehow the apparition has chosen a snapshot in time - presumably normally at the point of its final demise.

Maybe they keep the clothes that they wore at the same time.

Or maybe there are just no ghosts and the people who have the requisite imaginations to conjure up such an image in their minds have no trouble conjuring appropriate-looking attire as well.

Entertaining anagrams

Once in a while you come across a really entertaining anagram.  20 years ago I found myself amused by the irony of the anagram of government minister Virginia Bottomley's name.  It seemed humorously plausible as it seemed believable that she might claim "I'm an evil tory bigot"!

Having survived the Conservative government of that time, (which led quite directly to 10 years of Labour government), there was a period when 'Apple Macintosh' developed 'laptop machines'.  There is a surprising synergy between those two sides of an anagram.

On the other hand sometimes you hear one that is appears humorously antithetic.  It would be very surprising to find that "Brittney Spears"
is on of those "Presbyterians".

Emergency entrance!

How's your French?  I was surprised recently to pass the office of one of my Swiss colleagues and see this sign.

Entree de Secours - emergency entrance!

If you travel in Francophone countries at all you will probably have noticed signs saying 'Sortie de secours' - meaning 'Emergency Exit'.  So this sign for an emergency entrance is both humorous and delightful.  It suggests that if you need help you have come to the right place.

Small note:  The gentleman concerned in invariably helpful too.

Children drive parents to distraction!

Are the children of this century harder to deal with than in the last?  I doubt it.  I suspect that children have always pushed the limits and made life difficult for their parents.

My mother says that I didn't (although I don't think I really believe her).  Perhaps that demonstrates a flaw in my character, or in her memory (or mine).

I suspect that my de-conversion from Christianity to determined atheism hasn't even affected her view on that topic.  She will never be an atheist, but I'm sure she understands why I have arrived in this state.

I observe other parents of today struggling with their own children and I sometimes want to reassure them with a classical quotation.  How about this one?

"Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannise their teachers." -- Socrates

So it is not a very new problem then!